Civil war in Lebanon

Press, 10 September 1983, Page 16

Civil war in Lebanon

The underlying, cause of the civil war in Lebanon in 1975 and 1976 was dissatisfaction with the way political power was allocated between religious and political groups. The fighting among Lebanese groups now is largely the result of the same dissatisfaction. There is every reason to consider the present fighting is a continuation of the Lebanese civil war, complicated by new factors such as the presence of foreign troops. Lebanon is as far from resolution of its internal divisions as it ever was. Lebanon became independent in 1944. The formula for allocating political power continued to be based on a census of dubious accuracy conducted by the French in 1932. A solution is being sought now through civil war, fought with a savagery that takes little account of civilians or, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross, of the need to bring relief to those trapped between the factions.

As a result of the 1932 census, the Maronites were considered the largest community in Lebanon. They are Christians, divided among a number of clans, some of them hostile to one another, who are in communion with Rome. The Maronites form perhaps 20 per cent of the population of Lebanon. However, on the basis of the 1932 census they claim the post of President and Chief of the Armed Services should be reserved for one of their number. The Falangists are a party of the Maronites. Franco and Hitler were important influences when the father of President Amin Gemayel, the present President of Lebanon, founded the party after he had attended the Berlin Olympic Games in 1936. Gemayel senior was the goalkeeper for the Lebanese soccer team. The Sunni Muslims, on the basis of the census, claim to be the second largest group in Lebanon, and to be entitled to the office of Prime Minister. They are probably smaller than the Shi’ite Muslim group which has about a million members in Lebanon and is the largest single community. The Shi’ites are the poorest community and one of the weakest politically. The Druses, connected with the Muslims, number about 250,000 and have a strong militia in the hills near Beirut.

Although the Lebanese Army has Sunnis, Shi’ites, and Druses in its ranks, its higher echelons are dominated by Maronites. The Lebanese Army is therefore seen by some of the other communities in Lebanon as the force used by the Maronite Government to impose its

authority on the rest of Lebanon. Since the only hope of peace in Lebanon appears to lie in one group keeping order, and the Government forces seem to be the only ones on whom such a role should fall, the prospect of peace seems remote. The Shi’ites and the Druses have joined forces against the Maronite Government in the present fighting round Beirut. The civil war is complicated by the presence of foreign troops in Lebanon. The Syrians show no sign of leaving their stronghold in the Bekaa Mountains, east of Beirut. The Israelis have withdrawn south to the Awali River, some 35 kilometres south of Beirut and hold a line crossing Lebanon. From Israel’s northern border the line is up to 40 kilometres north. In Beirut, Americans and Europeans try to keep the peace, but have been losing a number of soldiers in the clashes. Flights over Beirut by American and French aircraft are ah indication of the impatience felt by these peacekeeping forces. The Israeli and Syrian troops in Lebanon are far from neutral. The invasion by Israel last year was an attempt to secure a buffer zone and see installed in Lebanon a government with which Israel could co-operate. The Government of Mr Amin Gemayel has not given Israel all the co-operation it sought, though it is of a persuasion favoured by Israel. The peace-keeping forces, although international, are there largely because of American insistence. To many Muslims, the Americans are seen as supporting Israeli aims. The Syrians have been in Lebanon since 1975 and have their own strategic interests to consider. Syria continues to seek the return of the Golan Heights from Israeli occupation. Syria would also welcome a share in any permanent partition of Lebanon, especially if it improved Syria’s access to the Mediterranean coast and presented Israel with another stretch of hostile border. The outcome of fighting among Lebanon’s factions depends finally on the degree of support that each receives from Israel and Syria. Neither of Lebanon’s neighbours will abandon the field, if this would seem to be giving advantage to the other. The Lebanese Government is so far incapable of controlling even the small territory round Beirut. Lebanon’s factions are left scrabbling for the fragment of their country that enjoys a degree of independence while half their country is under Syrian control and another quarter remains under Israeli occupation.